According to this: http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/10/vista-successor-vienna-planned-for-late-2009/

A MS official told PC World Vistas successor Vienna will come in late 2009 and will aim for "full virtualization and a radical new user interface".
Now that seems to me like Gnome 3.0 should get a roadmap in the near future. The nearer the better.

If MS is really going for a human centric UI (kind of what is thought about concerning Gnome 3.0) we shouldn't let them have a head start. There is loads of work in that direction and they have more time to do it.

I guess when they do it right and if we do nothing, the times of increasing numbers of linux on the desktop will be over.

FuturePilot

February 11th, 2007, 06:36 PM

I heard something about this. Apparently the new interface is going to look like Mac OS X.
Read this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_%22Vienna%22)
Something about a program launcher and moving the task bar to the top.

23meg

February 11th, 2007, 06:44 PM

A MS official told PC World Vistas successor Vienna will come in late 2009 That means it's most likely to come in mid-2011.

If MS is really going for a human centric UI (kind of what is thought about concerning Gnome 3.0) we shouldn't let them have a head start. At the moment, the number of people who make informed choices based on the merits of all available operating systems, including ours, is low enough not to be of critical value. The majority of people don't choose Windows because it has better features, they mostly don't even choose it; they just take it for granted as what ships with their computer and what most of their friends use.

This isn't to say that outperforming Windows doesn't matter, or that people will always gravitate towards Windows, but in general I disagree with the "if we don't match Windows and OSX feature by feature, we'll lose" mindset.

I guess when they do it right and if we do nothing, That's a very slim possibility; when, in what given time frame, have we done nothing?
the times of increasing numbers of linux on the desktop will be over.I disagree; see above.

mips

February 11th, 2007, 07:03 PM

Shame, they have to battle with so much legacy code.

If I was them I would start from scratch and say 'screw backward compatibility' we will give you Vista in a virtual machine for those applications you want to run.

einalex

February 11th, 2007, 07:12 PM

That means it's most likely to come in mid-2011.
I wouldn't count on that. They wake up in Redmond. Look at the security push.
The they're-MS-they-talk-****-they-produce-**** attitude won't work much longer.

At the moment, the number of people who make informed choices based on the merits of all available operating systems, including ours, is low enough not to be of critical value. The majority of people don't choose Windows because it has better features, they mostly don't even choose it; they just take it for granted as what ships with their computer and what most of their friends use.

It's simple: the people who use Linux certainly did that choice for themselves. that is why if MS produces an OS really usable they might chose different. the ones who just take what comes with their pc aren't the ones using Linux.
-> since our user base consist of people doing the choice for themselves, we have to be attractive. If we were a monopoly like MS we don't have to be attractive (at least not to users).
-> for Linux this number is of critical value.

This isn't to say that outperforming Windows doesn't matter, or that people will always gravitate towards Windows, but in general I disagree with the "if we don't match Windows and OSX feature by feature, we'll lose " mindset.

I didn't say "match Windows ... feature by feature. I said: Start working on our idea of how a desktop should work and stop fear then api break. It doesn't even need to be absolute choice. Do both, but do it.

That's a very slim possibility; when, in what given time frame, have we done nothing?I disagree; see above.

Let me say it in a different way:
Evolving to this new idea of an UI simply won't work. It's a whole new concept, and it comes with loads of changes. One example: you need functionalities instead of programs. Hwen you want to edit a picture, you don't load the gimp/your program of choice, you load a functionality/plugin/name of choice to do it.
Another example: tagging file systems.

Even our current way of creating software won't work.
Currently a program uses for example Gnomes and GTKs features. 3.0 would work the other way round. Gnome would use the programs/functionalities features.

These are huge changes. Evolution won't work with them.

Since Gnome says, we don't want the next API change we will take little steps. In my eyes, they don't take the right path -> Nothing is done.

@Mips: the way I understand it. "Both of these suggestions lend credence to previous reports that a break in compatiblity with older applications and a new user interface would be Vienna's flagship features" means exactly that.

BarfBag

February 11th, 2007, 07:14 PM

I agree with mips. They need to dump the system altogether and start from scratch. Backwards compatibility wouldn't be any different of an issue then it is now. Even though each version of Windows has similar code, there's still compatibility issues with a lot of apps. They'd be better off writing some kind of emulation built into the system.

We have nothing to worry about. Vienna will be delayed, just like Vista - and will probably be the same old Windows with an OS X theme slapped on top. They're getting desperate.

SunnyRabbiera

February 11th, 2007, 07:26 PM

If this is true then Vista will have a very short lifespan compared to most other varients.
Even windows 95 and 98 had longer spans.

Quillz

February 11th, 2007, 07:30 PM

If this is true then Vista will have a very short lifespan compared to most other varients.
Even windows 95 and 98 had longer spans.
Of course, there was ME, which lasted for about a year before being replaced by XP.

But remember that XP is supported by Microsoft until 2011, which means Vista will last even longer.

23meg

February 11th, 2007, 07:35 PM

I wouldn't count on that. They wake up in Redmond. Look at the security push.
The they're-MS-they-talk-****-they-produce-**** attitude won't work much longer.That's not my attitude, and the security push, or your assumption that they're "waking up" has nothing to do with the fact that it's their tradition to delay products. That was the only point I made; I didn't say they talk or produce ****.

It's simple: the people who use Linux certainly did that choice for themselves. that is why if MS produces an OS really usable they might chose different. the ones who just take what comes with their pc aren't the ones using Linux.
-> since our user base consist of people doing the choice for themselves, we have to be attractive. If we were a monopoly like MS we don't have to be attractive (at least not to users).
-> for Linux this number is of critical value.I'm not really worried that over time we may start to be unable to deliver enough quality goods to keep our present user base interested. This is beside the fact that a good portion of Linux users are tied to it by principle, or choose it because of various dissatisfactions with proprietary operating systems that I think will persist in the near future.

I didn't say "match Windows ... feature by feature. I said: Start working on our idea of how a desktop should work and stop fear then api break. It doesn't even need to be absolute choice. Do both, but do it.I know you didn't specifically say that, hence my saying that I don't agree with that as a general mindset.

As for the API change, I'm not informed well enough on the technical side to discuss it.

Let me say it in a different way:
Evolving to this new idea of an UI simply won't work. It's a whole new concept, and it comes with loads of changes. What exactly is this whole new concept? What's the justification to pursue it? As far as the thread topic is concerned, Microsoft hasn't given any details that this is the way they'll be going.
One example: you need functionalities instead of programs. Hwen you want to edit a picture, you don't load the gimp/your program of choice, you load a functionality/plugin/name of choice to do it.A functionality of what, or a plugin to what?

Another example: tagging file systems.I agree that tagged file organization is a must have. It may not have to implemented on the filesystem level though; maybe a virtual filesystem (such as GnomeVFS) can take care of it. By the way, check out Leaftag if you haven't.

Adamant1988

February 11th, 2007, 07:54 PM

I don't think we will see it in '09 truth be told. I look forward to seeing if Microsoft can turn themselves around, because right now everyone hates them.

EmilyRose

February 11th, 2007, 08:02 PM

Given the sorts of horrific DRM restrictions in Vista, I can't even begin to imagine the kinds of content restrictions that will be inherent in MS' next system. It makes me sick to even think about it, in fact. Of course, by then, we'll undoubtly have seen either a: the death of Trusted Computing (my personal hope and prayer) or b: Trusted Computing will have become a reality, along with more DRM-type restrictions on the internet than you or I can even fathom, so you'll have a 'choice' - buy/use MS stuff, or not use most of the commercial internet.

einalex

February 11th, 2007, 08:20 PM

I can't tell you, what MS will do. I can only suspect that they copy from others ideas (gnome 3.0 and some prototype presentations floating around the net)

With Gnome 3.0 ideas are to focus on the things you want to do and the objects you want to edit. So you don't have an image editor and an image file versus a text editor and a text file. You have a document which you can manipulate in various means, like add text or a graphic or edit text or graphic.
You don't get menu point "start the gimp" you get menu points "create a picture".

So you don't have "the file" and "the program" and "the path to the file".
Instead you get your stuff that matters to you: your photos and texts and videos and you get means/tools to do things with them.
developer/program centric world -> user/object centric world
Take a look at http://live.gnome.org/ScratchPad for more information.

My point on the watch MS talk: if they announce 3 years, even if it takes longer say 6 years I can't imagine the opensource community anywhere near these concepts. Because they break compatibility, they render a lot of software useless and they cost an insane amount of time to realise.
BUT they are needed. It is time. MS or not MS. Look at what products hit the tech market. mp3 players, HTPCs, mobile phones etc. it-technology gets into everyday life and with that it has to work for John Q. Public. Windows and programs - oh come on! We have to drop this nonsense and give him something he already knows from his life.

This patent application shows that Vienna is likely to be an "Evil DRMed Debian". I think they might be going overboard with their user restrictions, and that can only be good news for us.

bastiegast

February 11th, 2007, 09:57 PM

I don't think we have to worry. Until not long ago, linux' user interface was catching up with OSX and Windows. Windows 98 was crap but it's user interface was way more user friendly than linux' (at least from what I've heard). Now we can actually see MS is catching up on linux' (by that I mean GNOME and KDE together with stuff like beagle and beryl). So we are surpassing Windows and continue a steady development. By the time Vienna comes Windows might be behind on linux. (From a user-interface POV of course, we all know linux' overall design has always been better ;) )

Phatfiddler

February 11th, 2007, 11:01 PM

Wasn't Vienna supposed to be released a few years ago? If I remember correctly, Vista was nothing more than an after-thought, and Vienna was supposed to replace XP. Seems like the same tactic MS has tried year after year: announce something spectacular to keep your current customers with you, then release it years later with far less options than originally planned, covering it all up by over-advertising the few features that exist. *cough Vista*

By continuing to develop the most secure operating system possible, by innovating with interfaces, and by creating cutting edge applications to run on the system.

Infact just exactly same thing the open source community has been doing for the last decade just better.

einalex

February 12th, 2007, 12:13 AM

Listen guys the GUI all the OS today use is archaic! decades old! how can you say it's cutting edge? A bit of 3d acceleration doesn't make the UI modern. It just polishes it a bit.
The changes have to run on a larger scale.